Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Psychotic Ramblings from a Diseased, Alcohol Sodden Brain

Am I stupid? Well the facts are irrefutable, I must be! I keep falling for the Republican's bullshit and end up contributing my time and money to our "cause" and in the end the establishment just keeps Jujitsu-ing my ass into a top-rope Flying Brain Chop takedown for the pinfall.
You remember they told us yeah sure we worked with Democrats to get Thad Cochran through the primary down in Missississippi, we had to. We didn't want a Tea Party guy nominated, he couldn't get elected. Of course if one absolutely had to have a Tea Party candidate can you think of a better State to run the guy in than Missississippi? The Tea Party dude woulda won going away, ask Mary Landrieu! But the fact is the Establishment pricks would have preferred the Democrat.
To prove it I refer you to Ken Cuccinelli in Virginia. Do you think maybe he could have won the Governor's race against friggin' Terry the Clinton ass lick if just a little RNC cash had come his way? Cuccinelli would have won by 8 points.
Now here we go with the omnibus budget bill to fund every Goddamn piece-of-shit Obama program for the better part of next year. Forget about the fact that the budget process has been a shame for years. Forget about the fact the government has been living off continuing resolutions since before Harry Reid had pubbs. Now all of a sudden the Democrats want to lock in a budget for as long as they can...HUGE SURPRISE! But Boehner decides "wow, gee, we don't have the votes right now so what should we do Nancy?"
So if I understand this right, the Republicans ran on stopping Obamacare, the insane immigration surrender and every little leftist law and regulation these socialist pricks have instituted these past six years, but now, during lame-duck sessions the Republicans decided to give away the farm and lock Dem policies in place for at least a year? My God in Heaven! And I though Obama pussied out in Iraq!

This UVA thing is disturbing but sadly not at all surprising. As you may know Tickbite ain't that far from Durham and a similar fiasco not so long ago. Due to the luck of proximity I had the benefit of national as well as local coverage of the Duke Lacrosse thing. Now I'm no genius (I have mentioned that before haven't I?) but I do have special insight into the leftist/liberal mind (it's a gift). I'm usually, not 100% mind you, but I'm usually never wrong when it comes to ferreting out their motives. I was very vocal from the beginning that Duke Lacrosse was all a pack of lies. No way a bunch of white boys would rape a nasty friggin' stripper, especially Crystal Mangum. She has all the sex appeal of a...well I won't go there. But it was obvious, a skank ho looking to "get paid" versus a bunch of La Costa wearing Ivy Leaguers (or their reasonable equivalent). I just could not see them shagging that, much less rape! Plus how do you go about raping someone like Crystal Mangum? Gee, if that's what you're into offer her a pack of Kools and climb aboard, why get involved in a fight? She'd probably kick your ass anyway. Now Beyonce maybe, I could see that (not rape but...you know). Skank-ass Crystal Mangum? Forgetaboutit, way way WAY too ghetto!
Anyway, back to the point. The fraternity slandered in this UVA thing should take legal action against the accuser, Rolling Stone magazine and every publication involved in spreading this malicious lie. The Chancellor of UVA needs to lift the suspension of sororities and fraternities and cut out the feminist drivel emanating from her fat pie-hole. She's given lip service to the fact that this was all made up bullshit but she's acting as if it were true. If she doesn't get her mind right then guys like CW should put some pressure on the university and see about firing the halfwit. She is not doing the students, the alumni nor the reputation of this absolute powerhouse of an academic institution any favors with her politically correct sanctions (it may be a lie but we KNOW the narrative is correct...and nows our chance). These school administrators have to be held accountable! At Duke Brodhead wasn't, the gang of 80+ leftist professors who hung the lacrosse players out to dry weren't, and that was fundamentally unjust. Nows OUR chance, get 'er done CW.

Did you see that North Carolina is 6th in teachers having illicit sex with students? We had one carpet-munching teacher (not that there's anything wrong with that) who had the student's name tattooed on her arm! Now that's some brazen shit is it not? I swear every time I turn around some phys ed instructor is getting busted for banging some 16 year old. But during the Hagan/Tillis campaign the NCAE was all about how the teachers were "professionals" and how they were mistreated, used and abused and of course HORRIBLY underpaid. Well correct me if I'm wrong, but don't professional organizations police themselves? Don't doctors police other doctors, lawyers lawyers etc.? Since when has a teacher's union policed anything? They're the ones getting lawyers for these pedos running rampant in our schools.

Well that's it, I'm outta scotch so must be time to go.

5 comments:

The Conservative Wahoo said...

Classic!

Anonymous said...

Not saying you're wrong, but there is very little evidence on both sides concerning the UVA topic, there are also some shady circumstances concerning the two sides

1. Rolling Stone has come out to say Jackie was not a credible source due to "new information" what exactly is this info?

2. Apparently in comes from the fraternity itself who "had no event" on that specific date... Yeah, and? There is a mixer, party, something unscheduled going on at any college campus any night of the week, it just feels shady.

3. The initial investigator the picked for this case WAS A MEMBER OF THE FRATERNITY. Sure there's no conflict of interest there *sarcasm*

I think it's important to take all the viable information we can get before we start making such direct assumptions. Someone SHOULD investigate this case thoroughly, and someone who's not tied to the University. For all we know Jackie could have been a false accuser, there are circumstances in the story that lead me to believe it could be true and that the questioning of her integrity could've had to do with some dirty politics (ala $moola$). My personal opinion? I hope she isn't lying for the sake of the story's integrity. It started to spark a national discussion of rape culture in both fraternities and college campuses, and don't deny that this culture doesn't exist. This stuff happens, it's real. And if we've learned anything from prestigious institutions is that they'll do anything to save their own skin when it comes to these situations. We all learned this with the Jerry Sandusky case at Penn State.

Let's not sweep this one under the rug just yet.

The Conservative Wahoo said...

Sorry Anon, your case for restraint is a weak one. Very, very, weak.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/u-va-students-challenge-rolling-stone-account-of-attack/2014/12/10/ef345e42-7fcb-11e4-81fd-8c4814dfa9d7_story.html?hpid=z1

Anonymous said...

Well then let's let this investigation go under way and get some actual evidence before we make actions to sue Jackie, or Rolling Stone. All of this is very "he-said, she-said" as with a lot of sexual assault cases, so it's that much harder to determine. Yes her details are skewed to a larger extent than we thought, but with traumatic events like these details are bound to get skewed.

What is your opinion on the larger question at hand concerning rape culture and universities? After all this was a traditional drinking song at the University from the 1940's until recently:

"From Rugby Road to Vinegar Hill, We're gonna get drunk tonight.
The faculty's afraid of us, They know we're in the right,
So fill your cups, your loving cups, As full as full can be,
And as long as love and liquor last, We'll drink to the U. of V.

Refrain: Oh, I think we need another drink! Heh!
I think we need another drink! Heh!
I think we need another drink! Heh!
I think we need another drink! To the glory of the U. Va.

All you girls from Mary Washington and R.M.W.C,
Never let a Virginia man an inch above your knee,
He'll take you to his fraternity house and fill you full of beer,
And soon you'll be the mother of a bastard Cavalier!"



The Conservative Wahoo said...

Anon--a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, huh?

I am a UVA graduate, though it was a long time ago, 1987, and I was at UVA on the Saturday after the story broke. I attended a birthday party at a tailgate before the game. In the course of that afternoon, I talked with over 20 different people. Half of them knew one verse to that song, the first. The other half didn't even know the first. I happened to know both the verses you cite, but none of the others.

As for the "he said she said" nature of things, that may be true. But very few were so forgiving or passe with the entire fraternity system was suspended based on "she said"--not to the police, mind you, but to a reporter with an agenda.

What is my opinion on "the larger question at hand concerning rape culture and universities". I have a few thoughts. First, the "rape culture" is somewhat of a fiction, as a young woman is 1.7 times more likely to be raped if she is NOT a college student than if she is. (see http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/11/college-girls-are-less-likely-to-be-raped-than-non-students.html from a federal Bureau of Justice Statistics study).

Second, to the extent that there is a problem with rape at universities, that problem is that universities have created these ridiculous, quasi-legal processes to deal with what should be considered a heinous crime. This is couched in the mantle of "protecting victims", but it invariably protects the universities.

Your "Yes her details are skewed to a larger extent than we thought, but with traumatic events like these details are bound to get skewed" dramatically understates the degree of fiction. Let me quote to you from Hanna Rosin's piece at slate (Ms. Rosin clearly should not be confused with being a rape denier): "The Post story doesn’t connect all the dots, but it’s not hard to do. Jackie has now given her friends two different names for the man she was with that night. Neither of them was in fact with her, ever dated her, or even knew her all that well. She appears to have invented a suitor, complete with fake text messages and a fake photo, which suggests a capacity for somewhat elaborate deception. Jackie, though, has not recanted her story. Her attorney would not answer questions for the Post's story on Wednesday and has told reporters to stop contacting Jackie."

So apparently the trauma you cite began BEFORE the alleged attack, as she seemingly conjured up a love interest AND his interest in her. None of this was caused by the alleged attack. None of it.

I'm glad you think that the potential for a trial and conviction of innocent men based on a largely fabricated story is worth it because of the "national discussion" it has created.

I'm all for bringing the light of day to this subject, to getting it out of university run star chambers and into courts of law. But I'm also all for the truth--both in storytelling and in the gathering and use of statistics. One of the interesting outgrowths of this "discussion" as you call it has been the scrutiny brought upon statistics such as the "one in five" trope that have been significantly undercut by intelligent people now re-assessing them.

Newer Post Older Post Home